[221] By virtue
of science's being very much what scientists do, the space science
program, if it was to be a good one, had to be what space
scientists made of it. Recognizing this, NASA built its space
science program on advice from the best scientific minds it could
get to think about the program. Over the years June Merker,
assistant to the author, kept a running record of recommendations
made to NASA by the many advisory bodies with which the space
science office had to deal. For each recommendation she put down
what NASA's response had been. A simple perusal is enough to
convince one that NASA did pay careful attention to what the
scientists were telling the agency.36

This accommodation to the scientific
community did not come about without much stress and strain.
Scientists are a contentious lot, habituated to open debate and
free expression of views, and the tremendous opportunities of the
space program inspired them to more intense dispute than usual.
One reviewer of this manuscript raised the question of why so much
attention should be paid to the quarrelsomeness of the space
scientists.37 Others expressed the view that even more attention
should be given the subject. In view of their special role and
position in the program, a certain noblesse oblige fell on the
space scientists.38 Nevertheless, much of the tension in the program
stemmed from the scientists' presumption of special privilege,
which at times Congress found irritating. Many scientists
[222] however-like Harry Hess, Charles Townes, John
Simpson, Eugene Parker, Fred Seitz, John Findlay, and Gerard
Kuiper-were invariably courteous and helpful.

But it should not be supposed that all the
stresses and strains were between NASA and those outside. There
were plenty of internal problems, and the space science program
had its share, some of which are discussed in chapters 14-16.